Description

Would it be possible to make the 'let' keyword in a do block optional? So instead of

do ...
let x = exp1
y = exp2
z <- exp3
...

you could simply write

do ...
x = exp1
y = exp2
z <- exp3
...

Where each sequence of let-less bindings is put in a separate binding group. I'm no parsing wizard, but I couldn't come up with any situations in which this would cause ambiguity. To me, the let-less version is easier on the eyes, more consistent with <- bindings, and also makes it less of a hassle to move stuff around.

The above probably also holds for list/monad comprehensions, but the explicit let has never really bothered me there.